ESB Networks AIP Programme Update to IGG 10th August 2006

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Agenda 1. Recap on where we are 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July 3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Agenda 1. Recap on where we are 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July 3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

ESB Networks AIP Programme: Recap on where we are : Timelines 3,6 or 9 month delay to the go-live date of the SEM The Regulatory Authorities announced that there will be a delay to the go-live date of the SEM from 1st July to 1st November 2007 Formal confirmation of impact on SIMDRACS workstream is awaited, working assumption today is that unless hear otherwise, is that ESB Networks have to be ready for Market Testing in April

22nd June - IGG discussion on Appendix 8 – Key Issues ESB Networks AIP Programme : Recap on where we are : Review of Interaction with IGG/TAG 18th May - Introduction 1st June - Draft ver 0.1 ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued to IGG 7th June - Special IGG 21st June - Draft ver 0.2 ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued to IGG 22nd June - IGG discussion on Appendix 8 – Key Issues - TAG discussion on Key Issues 29th June - Responses from Market Participants 4th July - SIMDRACS Co-Ordinator clarifications/decisions 7th July - Draft ver 0.3 [Appendix 8] ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued 13th July - Special IGG

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Recap on where we are : Review of Interaction with IGG/TAG contd Before the Special IGG of 7th June 2006, a first draft discussion document entitled ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued from ESB Networks AIP programme. This set out the impacts for the Irish Retail Market that had at that time been identified by ESB Networks as a result of the AIP, in so far as the requirements were known. Before the IGG of the 22nd June 2006, all key design issues were included in Appendix 8 in the second draft of the discussion document. At the IGG on the 22nd June there was a walk through of each of the issues in that document. Before the IGG of the 13th July , updated Appendix 8 issued on 7th July , ver 0.3, containing Feedback from Market Participants, SIMDRACS Co-Ordinator, New requirements received from Regulatory Authority, and review of Design Issues by ESB Networks Following the IGG of the 13th July, four Market participants responded to specific queries raised at that IGG. ESB Networks AIP Programme has formally written to CER/SIMDRACS to get agreement to proceed with the detailed design based on what has been discussed with the IGG

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Agenda 1. Recap on where we are 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July 3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

The responses are documented in the following slides ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July Background At the Special IGG on 13th July there was a review of all Issues in ver 0.3 of Appendix 8 of ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’. It was agreed that the following items would be considered further by Market Participants and responses forwarded by Friday July 21st: Responses Four Market Participants responded The responses are documented in the following slides [Original text of the queries is in Blue]

1 Market Participant does want Estimated data at D+1 ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd 1. If Indicative Aggregation goes ahead, then [Issues 25 & 26] Is Estimated QH Data needed at D+1 by Suppliers, Participant Generators and TSO Responses 3 Market Participants do not want Estimated data at D+1 1 Market Participant does want Estimated data at D+1 If Yes, then Is versioning of 341 messages needed and is the indicative flag needed Only 1 Market Participant responded, and does not want the indicative flag If No , then Is versioning of 341 messages needed anyhow Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that if Indicative Aggregation goes ahead, that estimates generated at D+1 for indicative would only be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained, unless there is a clear need to send the estimates at D+1. This would also mean that the Indicative Flag would not be progressed. We will separately consider the versioning issue based on responses. 2 Market Participants do want versioning of 341 messages to be implemented 1 Market Participant sees versioning as a potential future need for themselves, but not now The forth respondent offered no view as to whether they wanted versioning or not

be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained. ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd Question 1, contd Business Rationale for Indicative Aggregation is still under review with CER Current Proposals It is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that if Indicative Aggregation goes ahead, that estimates generated at D+1 for indicative would only be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained. This means that the Indicative Flag would not be progressed. Provisional Proposal is to proceed with Versioning of 341 messages , subject to other changes being approved to 341 message, and impact assessment on Project Timelines and funding approval

few days to clarify responses, and will update Market Participants in ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd 2. Is the Supplier Unit ID required in the 341 message [New item arising at the Special IGG 13.7.2006 ] Responses 1 Market Participant clearly wants the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message 1 Market Participant may want the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message 1 Market Participant does not need the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message 1 Market Participant does not need nor want the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message Note ESB Networks will be contacting certain Market Participants over the next few days to clarify responses, and will update Market Participants in Draft ver 0.4 at end of August

messages would contain kWhs ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd 3 Are MWhs needed in the 5x1,5x4,5x5 and 5x8 messages [Issue 17] Responses 4 Market Participants are in favour of kWhs in these market messages Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that these messages would contain kWhs

messages need to contain a minus sign ESB Networks AIP Programme : 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd 4 Signing [Issue 9] Does the aggregated consumption in each of the 96 intervals in the 5x1 and 5x5 messages need to contain a minus sign Does the generator data in each of the 96 intervals in the 5x4 and 5x8 messages need to contain a plus sign Responses 3 Market Participants do not need signing in these messages 1 Market Participant is in favour of signing for these messages Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that these messages would not contain any signs

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Agenda 1. Recap on where we are 2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July 3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd. With agreement of the CER, for the core design, ESB Networks will proceed based on the working assumptions outstanding items will be reviewed with the IGG as and when the information is available Provisional Plan: NB there are dependencies on status of items from 18th August meeting 31st August - Draft ver 0.4 updated - see following slides 7th September - Special IGG to discuss any new issues and proposals and looking for agreement to proceed to MCR 14th September - Issue of MCRs 21st September - IGG to approve MCRs all subsequent changes will be progressed through formal MCR change control process

For Discussion on 18th August by SIMDRACS Board: ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG Next Steps For Discussion on 18th August by SIMDRACS Board: Updated Draft Regulatory Requirements document from SIMDRACS - at ver 0.55 since 17.7.2006 this includes a potential new requirement for a Microgeneration solution Updated Baselined Requirements documents from SEMIT - at ver 1.2 since 3.8.2006 to be clarified with SMO on 18th August Potential change required to design to have Generation, Price Affecting Demand and Non-Price Affecting Demand sent to SMO separately instead of in one single message. Requirements for Price Affecting Demand in Associated Supplier Units Outcome of 18th August meetings including any changes to be included in draft ver 0.4

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd. 31st August - Draft ver 0.4 to issue to include: Body of text to be updated with outcomes from Issues Updated description of new SEM Entities and terms eg Participant Demand Customers, Trading Sites and Trading Site Supplier Units, Generator Units, Price-affecting Demand, Supplier Units, Associated Supplier Units Registration Process for Non-Participant Generators to include nomination and agreement of Supplier of the Supplier Unit against which the Non-Participant Generator export data will be netted Registration interfaces [manual] between Retail Market and SMO for SEM Participants and impact on Retail Market Registration processes to include rejection of registration request for a site into a Trading Site Supplier Unit, new rejection reason & code Interaction between Retail Market and SEM for registration into or out of a Trading Site Supplier Unit

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd. 31st August - Draft ver 0.4 to issue to include, contd: Any firm requirements or working assumptions from SIMDRACS/CER for De-Minimus Generation Any specific requirements of AIP to accommodate SOLR Impact of the outcome of ESB Networks /EirGrig Metering Responsibilities discussions, including Transmission connected Import-Only Demand SEM requirement for Price Affecting Demand and Generation on a Calendar Day basis and on a D+3 basis for Initial Aggregation [Indicative is D+1] Note that all Generators that are dispatchable or controllable could affect price and could either be Distribution or Transmission connected and potentially either Participant or Non-Participant Generators Participant Demand Customers could also affect price Interface between MRSO and EIRGRID [TSO] for the receipt of data that is agreed to be polled/validated/substituted/estimated by TSO Note that these discussions have yet to be concluded

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd. Recap: Provisional Plan: NB there are dependencies on status of items from 18th August meeting 31st August - Draft ver 0.4 updated 7th September - Special IGG to discuss any new issues and proposals and looking for agreement to proceed to MCR 14th September - Issue of MCRs 21st September - IGG to approve MCRs all subsequent changes will be progressed through formal MCR change control process

ESB Networks AIP Programme : Thank You